Comment

Comment by DURWIN WALTER DAVIS on September 26, 2011 at 5:39pm

I don't think its as simple as that.  There might be some USSC decisions, FAC decisions and stautes/CFRs, expanding/limiting the 14th(1) definition.  I've seen something recently and it might have been more directed at BHO's birther explanation (I don't remember if it was in support/against).  I'll try to find the material I had in mind when placing that opinion here.

Comment by Steve Tikas on September 26, 2011 at 3:15pm

Mr. Davis that is awesome.

 

Did anyone hear me say that I liked that someone could come over have a child and it be granted citizenship simply for being born on US ground?  No you didn't because that is not what I said.  I said that being born on US ground qualifies you as a citizen so they have different rights then the ones that cross the border.  Amendment 14 section one reads as follows "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

 

We can argue all day if it is right or not but that is the Constitution which we as Americans are to live by as the supreme law of the land and if we want it changed there is a process to go threw to get it changed.

Comment by DURWIN WALTER DAVIS on September 26, 2011 at 2:43pm

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years.      No one knows for sure how old he was, since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.     
He will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as:  Knowing when to come in out of the rain;  Why the early bird gets the worm; Life isn't always fair; And maybe it was my fault.  
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies, don't spend more than you can earn and adults, not children, are in charge. 
His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but overbearing regulations were set in place.  Reports of a 6-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.     
Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children.  It declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to administer sun lotion or an aspirin to a student; but could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.     
Common Sense lost the will to live as the churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment than their victims.    
Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault.    
Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.     
Common Sense was preceded in death;  by his parents,Truth and Trust, by his wife Discretion, his daughter Responsibility, and his son, Reason.  
He is survived by his 5 stepbrothers; I Know My Rights, I Want It Now, Someone Else Is To Blame, I'm A Victim, What? Me Work???    
Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.  If you still remember him, pass this on. If not, do nothing.

Comment by w. lee dungan jr. on September 26, 2011 at 2:42pm

your not at odds with me, I agree completely and the anchor baby debacle should have been fixed years ago.

Comment by DURWIN WALTER DAVIS on September 26, 2011 at 2:15pm

@Steve T:  I except your granting legal status to "anchor babies".  They are part of a criminal enterprise, using our good nature (welfare) against us; and those that actively participate to help the CRIMINAL INVADER to these ends (aiding and abedding) are acting tresonously and I would never (jury) convict anyone who takes these traitors out (extermination).  That's just invoking good pest control techniques.  I know not of any language (all of the law concerning citizenship) that allows such.  I know I am at odds with a lot of you on this, but remember, in the last presidential election, I voted for the AMERICAN. 

Comment by w. lee dungan jr. on September 26, 2011 at 2:12pm

sneak into america download a kid all medical expenses paid compliments of the U.S. taxpayer, wait there's more here's a citizenship for your kid. Oh by the way here's a menu of all our social programs.

 

Comment by Steve Tikas on September 26, 2011 at 1:12pm

Yes but if they are born in this country even by our own laws they are here legally.  Your point does apply to the ones that came over with their parents.  That is why I said if they can't, or don't want to, and I should have added are not able to support themselves they leave too.  Thank you for the correction.

Comment by w. lee dungan jr. on September 26, 2011 at 12:46pm

the offspring of criminal invaders are not the responsibility of the U.S. tax payer or the U.S. .

Comment by Steve Tikas on September 26, 2011 at 10:39am

I think we differ in our opinion on our drug war but at least we seem to agree in the non-violent ones.  The violent ones would be breaking the laws even if there was no drug policy.  This is one thing I disagree with Ron Paul on I think we should build the wall I see his point on keeping people in but that is something I'm willing to risk.  I agree with you that we should put more effort into finding and deporting, and then making sure they don't come back.

I do think that going after the reason they come to this country will be a better fix then even the wall but I think they should all be part of the solution.  We should find and deport the ones that are here illegally, build the wall, make e-verify a requirement for hiring, have such strict laws that employers would be scared as hell to hire an illegal. 

The only thing I have a hard time with are the kids of the ones that came here illegally that have grown up here.  They came as no fault of their own and have grown up here.  My initial feeling is kick the parent out and if they kids can't, or don't want to stay, they leave too.

Comment by DURWIN WALTER DAVIS on September 26, 2011 at 10:09am

I believe not another non-violent crime should be persued in this county until all of the "CIMINAL INVADERS" are arrested and held in army bivouac housing, including the double concentina wire/barbed wire enclosures.  Don't complain about the mosquitos, the heat, etc., that's what you CRIMINALLY CAME FOR!  Go back to your country and fix it to replicate ours; don't inconvenience me into paying higher taxes to support your cowardly tail!  The Sheriff should APPLY HIS OATH OF OFFICE TOTALLY!!!  Instead he enforces selective parts of it.  Obviously he's never heard of a REAL SHERIFF such as Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona.  I wounder how many of the murders that occur in this county are from illegal drugs smuggled into this county by the CRIMINAL INVADERS HE'S PROTECTING?!?!?!  The black community should be on his little red tail about this.  I wonder why Don Foy of Mad Dads (whom I suppoerted in the last elections) doesn't jump on this???  Yea, Don!  I'm calling you out on this!  Why the wimpy, limp wristed application to this problem???

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• …
• 24
• Next ›
• Page